This doesn't make sense. An eight-year-old can't just give his dad the finger and hop a Greyhound to grandma's house.

i had misread the post I was replying to, but children are a subject of even more controversy in this whole TSA debacle anyways. I agree that children shouldnt be touched by a TSA employee and I bet it will take all of 3 minutes for scanned pictures of children to hit the net. Again, I DO NOT THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA..... sooooooooo... I wont be taking my children on airplanes. Problem Solved.

So, people who a) object to being needlessly x-rayed and/or felt up and b) must travel for work should quit their jobs and find new ones that don't require air travel. This does not seem like an acceptable solution to this issue.Signed,someone who wouldn't have a jobif she didn't have her current jobwhich requires air travel

The whole "get a different job if you don't like it!" line is exactly the same as someone telling a server or bartender to get a different job if they want to make more money, be disrespected less blatantly, etc. It's simply not possible for a lot of people to do this, particularly in this economic climate. I don't think that the TSA should have carte blanche to infringe upon travelers' civil liberties simply because they're too privileged (???) to be able to quit their job and take up a different line of work, too young to make their own travel decisions, and/or financially unable to shell out and take off of work for days of cross-country traveling via Greyhound or Amtrak. Note that a cross-country Amtrak ticket is HUNDREDS of dollars more expensive than airfare if you don't want to spend 30+ hours sitting in coach.

I already told my boss that I'm not flying until this nonsense is over with, and all I can do is hope that he can empathize, lest I be forced to wear one of these handy-dandy t-shirts.

1st, sure, its a totally flippant response, but it's also the only real answer if no one can stop this bodyscanner business. If we are forced to submit to something of this nature, and you don't want to do it, then you will just have to live with the reality that you wont be able to fly, or work for a company that asks you to fly. I don't think its RIGHT or even OKAY for that matter, but thats just the way its going to have to work until something else can be figured out.

2nd, I totally agree with your last statement. I was just responding to Eppy's comment that there are some human rights that cannot be achieved without air travel. Again, I am not defending these people or this decision, I think it's stupid and worthless, BUT since I prefer to fly and get to my destination in hours rather than days, I will just have to put up with it.

1st, sure, its a totally flippant response, but it's also the only real answer if no one can stop this bodyscanner business. If we are forced to submit to something of this nature, and you don't want to do it, then you will just have to live with the reality that you wont be able to fly, or work for a company that asks you to fly. I don't think its RIGHT or even OKAY for that matter, but thats just the way its going to have to work until something else can be figured out.

2nd, I totally agree with your last statement. I was just responding to Eppy's comment that there are some human rights that cannot be achieved without air travel. Again, I am not defending these people or this decision, I think it's stupid and worthless, BUT since I prefer to fly and get to my destination in hours rather than days, I will just have to put up with it.

1. Who says we can't stop this? The primary thing that is bothering people is that people are just accepting that "this is how it is now," even if those accepting it still think it sucks. Why not do what we can to NOT accept it and not throw people who are seriously affected by the new procedures under the bus?

2. That's fine that you have your preference, but it's not fair to extrapolate from your own personal experience that it's not/shouldn't be that big a deal.

_________________These shitbirds should pay for their own elections if they aren't going to be obligated by any democratic pretense. - MumblesDon't you know that vegan meat is the gateway drug to chicken addiction? Because GMO and trans-fats. - kaerlighed

I'm sure when my roommate went to his grandmother's funeral in Burma he could have taken a hot air balloon or small sailboat.

this is what I am saying.sure, he COULD have taken a ship, if he was realllllllllllly that adamant about avoiding the bodyscanners... but he flew, which is the choice most reasonable human beings would make... SO because he chose the convenient, cheaper way to get to burma, he had to make a sacrifice...

I think everyone is totally misunderstanding me.

I do not think that these bodyscanners are a great idea, or okay, or anything of that nature. I think they are a violation of privacy, unnecessary and a waste of money... money that may even be helping line George Soros pockets.. but thats another thing and neither here nor there.

I am also saying that flying is not a right. Its a luxury. You cant argue that. I also have a job that will not allow me to take off work to allow me to forking WALK to every destination I so choose, SO I choose to fly and because I am a patron on an airplane, a customer, a client, (No one forced me onto the plane) then I will have to make that sacrifice until someone comes up with a better solution.

"There are several human rights that, for some people in certain situations, are only reasonably achievable through flight."

name them.seriously.name them.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights wrote:

Article 13.

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Article 14.

(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 23.

(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 27.

(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Certainly it doesn't take much to imagine scenarios in which the above human rights are "only reasonably be achievable through flight."

But I must apologize, because what I really should have emphasized is the fact that human rights are rights afforded to humans regardless of the mode of transportation they partake in. Pay close attention to article 30.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights wrote:

Article 1.

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 3.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 5.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 29.

(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30.

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

1st, sure, its a totally flippant response, but it's also the only real answer if no one can stop this bodyscanner business. If we are forced to submit to something of this nature, and you don't want to do it, then you will just have to live with the reality that you wont be able to fly, or work for a company that asks you to fly. I don't think its RIGHT or even OKAY for that matter, but thats just the way its going to have to work until something else can be figured out.

2nd, I totally agree with your last statement. I was just responding to Eppy's comment that there are some human rights that cannot be achieved without air travel. Again, I am not defending these people or this decision, I think it's stupid and worthless, BUT since I prefer to fly and get to my destination in hours rather than days, I will just have to put up with it.

1. Who says we can't stop this? The primary thing that is bothering people is that people are just accepting that "this is how it is now," even if those accepting it still think it sucks. Why not do what we can to NOT accept it and not throw people who are seriously affected by the new procedures under the bus?

2. That's fine that you have your preference, but it's not fair to extrapolate from your own personal experience that it's not/shouldn't be that big a deal.

I never said that it shouldn't be a big deal. when I don't like something, I boycott it, I am just suggesting that you do the same.

Hey, FF, I asked Mr. Elliptical about the Floridians and their push to get private contractors in place of TSA agents, and why that would be preferable. He started to explain that it was because the private organizations would implement more of an Israeli approach (interviewing/profiling-ish) rather than the useless scans... and then we were interrupted. So, I wasn't able to ask if they're going to try to get rid of the scanners in Florida or what is going to happen...

So, this post is pretty much useless except for the fact that they hope to implement more of an interviewing type approach rather than the scanning thing, but what if that leads to things like racial/ethnic profiling?

1st, sure, its a totally flippant response, but it's also the only real answer if no one can stop this bodyscanner business. If we are forced to submit to something of this nature, and you don't want to do it, then you will just have to live with the reality that you wont be able to fly, or work for a company that asks you to fly. I don't think its RIGHT or even OKAY for that matter, but thats just the way its going to have to work until something else can be figured out.

2nd, I totally agree with your last statement. I was just responding to Eppy's comment that there are some human rights that cannot be achieved without air travel. Again, I am not defending these people or this decision, I think it's stupid and worthless, BUT since I prefer to fly and get to my destination in hours rather than days, I will just have to put up with it.

1. Who says we can't stop this? The primary thing that is bothering people is that people are just accepting that "this is how it is now," even if those accepting it still think it sucks. Why not do what we can to NOT accept it and not throw people who are seriously affected by the new procedures under the bus?

2. That's fine that you have your preference, but it's not fair to extrapolate from your own personal experience that it's not/shouldn't be that big a deal.

I never said that it shouldn't be a big deal. when I don't like something, I boycott it, I am just suggesting that you do the same.

I'm not trying to give you a hard time, but what you're saying just seems dismissive to me. People are trying to explain how it's not as simple as just boycotting the thing you don't like, and your response is that people should boycott things they don't like, apparently regardless of their job status, financial situation, etc.

I don't understand why you see no grey area outside of "if you don't like it, don't do it." Are you suggesting people who are upset about this should just get over it unless they're willing to "put their money where their mouth is" and give up air travel altogether? I guess I don't really see what your point is beyond "you can boycott," which is fine, but people are definitely understanding it, and it probably needn't be re-stated.

_________________These shitbirds should pay for their own elections if they aren't going to be obligated by any democratic pretense. - MumblesDon't you know that vegan meat is the gateway drug to chicken addiction? Because GMO and trans-fats. - kaerlighed

"There are several human rights that, for some people in certain situations, are only reasonably achievable through flight."

name them.seriously.name them.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights wrote:

Article 13.

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Article 14.

(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 23.

(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 27.

(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Certainly it doesn't take much to imagine scenarios in which the above human rights are "only reasonably be achievable through flight."

But I must apologize, because what I really should have emphasized is the fact that human rights are rights afforded to humans regardless of the mode of transportation they partake in. Pay close attention to article 30.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights wrote:

Article 1.

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 3.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 5.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 29.

(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30.

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

oooookay. SO... none of those are ONLY achieved through flight! WE LIVED WITHOUT AIR TRAVEL FOR EONS! Flight is a relatively NEW thing, especially flight as frequent and as accessible as it is today. IT IS A MODERN CONVENIENCE. You don't think I have had to deal with a bunch of shittake from the TSA nearly EVERY time I used to go to the airport because I used to have an Arabic surname? My family is Middle Eastern and trust me, I almost always get picked for the "random" searches... but never until they saw my drivers license (I don't necessarily LOOK like I am of arab descent).

1st, sure, its a totally flippant response, but it's also the only real answer if no one can stop this bodyscanner business. If we are forced to submit to something of this nature, and you don't want to do it, then you will just have to live with the reality that you wont be able to fly, or work for a company that asks you to fly. I don't think its RIGHT or even OKAY for that matter, but thats just the way its going to have to work until something else can be figured out.

2nd, I totally agree with your last statement. I was just responding to Eppy's comment that there are some human rights that cannot be achieved without air travel. Again, I am not defending these people or this decision, I think it's stupid and worthless, BUT since I prefer to fly and get to my destination in hours rather than days, I will just have to put up with it.

1. Who says we can't stop this? The primary thing that is bothering people is that people are just accepting that "this is how it is now," even if those accepting it still think it sucks. Why not do what we can to NOT accept it and not throw people who are seriously affected by the new procedures under the bus?

2. That's fine that you have your preference, but it's not fair to extrapolate from your own personal experience that it's not/shouldn't be that big a deal.

I'm not trying to give you a hard time, but what you're saying just seems dismissive to me. People are trying to explain how it's not as simple as just boycotting the thing you don't like, and your response is that people should boycott things they don't like, apparently regardless of their job status, financial situation, etc.

I don't understand why you see no grey area outside of "if you don't like it, don't do it." Are you suggesting people who are upset about this should just get over it unless they're willing to "put their money where their mouth is" and give up air travel altogether? I guess I don't really see what your point is beyond "you can boycott," which is fine, but people are definitely understanding it, and it probably needn't be re-stated.

I know, I realize that I am being totally dismissive and flippant and disregarding the fact that giving up air travel only be feasable for someone with a lot of time and/or money, but its not the only way to get around, thats the only answer I have to all this, hence, why I am repeating myself. I dont enjoy being racially profiled either, but I have had to put up with it for years and years and years. Where were all of you defending my human rights then??

You say you don't like it, it's an invasion of privacy and you don't agree with it.And when you don't like something you boycott it.But you're still going to fly.

So the point is that you want us to boycott it, but not you?

nope, not the point at all.I am saying that it is an invasion of privacy and I do not agree with it.When I do not like something, I boycott it.But, because boycotting it IS NOT AN OPTION FOR ME (like it probably isnt for most of you) I am going to continue to fly and put up with it until something can be done. I am not defending them.I am simply saying that if it offended me and bothered me enough that I absolutely could not take it, I would not patronize them.

Hey, FF, I asked Mr. Elliptical about the Floridians and their push to get private contractors in place of TSA agents, and why that would be preferable. He started to explain that it was because the private organizations would implement more of an Israeli approach (interviewing/profiling-ish) rather than the useless scans... and then we were interrupted. So, I wasn't able to ask if they're going to try to get rid of the scanners in Florida or what is going to happen...

So, this post is pretty much useless except for the fact that they hope to implement more of an interviewing type approach rather than the scanning thing, but what if that leads to things like racial/ethnic profiling?

This is getting too deep for me.

Well, who the heck knows? I still say that privatizing RARELY means "making things more effective and reasonable " Instead, it almost always means "making things more profitable."

oooookay. SO... none of those are ONLY achieved through flight! WE LIVED WITHOUT AIR TRAVEL FOR EONS! Flight is a relatively NEW thing, especially flight as frequent and as accessible as it is today.

It got quoted a few times, but I'll say it again with a little emphasis just to make sure:

"There are several human rights that, for some people in certain situations, are only reasonably achievable through flight."

I'm not saying everyone can only achieve these through flight. I'm not even saying they can only be achieved through flight. I'm saying that there are definite situations where the reasonable way to achieve a human right is through flight.

hailseitan wrote:

IT IS A MODERN CONVENIENCE.

And a human right! Check out Article 27. How awesome is that? It's almost as if the folks that drafted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights knew what they were doing.

hailseitan wrote:

You don't think I have had to deal with a bunch of shittake from the TSA nearly EVERY time I used to go to the airport because I used to have an Arabic surname? My family is Middle Eastern and trust me, I almost always get picked for the "random" searches... but never until they saw my drivers license (I don't necessarily LOOK like I am of arab descent).

I don't know you from Adam and I did not know that hailseitan was an Arabic name.

hailseitan wrote:

So is that okay? and this is not?

For the record, I'm pro-human rights. That includes yours. So I don't particularly think what you go through is right. And I'm not sure why you thought I did.

I'm not trying to give you a hard time, but what you're saying just seems dismissive to me. People are trying to explain how it's not as simple as just boycotting the thing you don't like, and your response is that people should boycott things they don't like, apparently regardless of their job status, financial situation, etc.

I don't understand why you see no grey area outside of "if you don't like it, don't do it." Are you suggesting people who are upset about this should just get over it unless they're willing to "put their money where their mouth is" and give up air travel altogether? I guess I don't really see what your point is beyond "you can boycott," which is fine, but people are definitely understanding it, and it probably needn't be re-stated.

I know, I realize that I am being totally dismissive and flippant and disregarding the fact that giving up air travel only be feasable for someone with a lot of time and/or money, but its not the only way to get around, thats the only answer I have to all this, hence, why I am repeating myself. I dont enjoy being racially profiled either, but I have had to put up with it for years and years and years. Where were all of you defending my human rights then??

There are many members of this board, myself and Eppy included, who have vociferously decried racial profiling and still do. People have even done so, to an extent, in this very thread! It's unfair to say that because we care about this issue that we think it's A-okay to search people because of their race. If you want to start a thread about racial profiling, go for it. You will not find many people saying that you shouldn't fly because you don't like it.

As I said before, I get what you're saying, but what people are saying to you is that in some contexts, flying IS the ONLY way to travel. If you are going to a business meeting in NYC from Seattle, flying is the only way to go, not physically, because yes, you could take a bus or kayak or whatever, but within the context of you wanting to retain your job, you only have one option.

_________________These shitbirds should pay for their own elections if they aren't going to be obligated by any democratic pretense. - MumblesDon't you know that vegan meat is the gateway drug to chicken addiction? Because GMO and trans-fats. - kaerlighed

But, because boycotting it IS NOT AN OPTION FOR ME (like it probably isnt for most of you) I am going to continue to fly and put up with it until something can be done.

hailseitan wrote:

last time I checked EVERYONE has to do things they might not like to do, as I said before, Flying is a luxury, you ALWAYS have a choice to fly or not. Every example you have given of people who have "no choice" but to fly is ridiculous.

You seem confused.

_________________"I feel like it's not a real political discussion if I'm not morally opposed to something I don't understand." - ndpittman

Last edited by b.vicious on Tue Nov 23, 2010 1:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I'm not trying to give you a hard time, but what you're saying just seems dismissive to me. People are trying to explain how it's not as simple as just boycotting the thing you don't like, and your response is that people should boycott things they don't like, apparently regardless of their job status, financial situation, etc.

I don't understand why you see no grey area outside of "if you don't like it, don't do it." Are you suggesting people who are upset about this should just get over it unless they're willing to "put their money where their mouth is" and give up air travel altogether? I guess I don't really see what your point is beyond "you can boycott," which is fine, but people are definitely understanding it, and it probably needn't be re-stated.

I know, I realize that I am being totally dismissive and flippant and disregarding the fact that giving up air travel only be feasable for someone with a lot of time and/or money, but its not the only way to get around, thats the only answer I have to all this, hence, why I am repeating myself. I dont enjoy being racially profiled either, but I have had to put up with it for years and years and years. Where were all of you defending my human rights then??

There are many members of this board, myself and Eppy included, who have vociferously decried racial profiling and still do. People have even done so, to an extent, in this very thread! It's unfair to say that because we care about this issue that we think it's A-okay to search people because of their race. If you want to start a thread about racial profiling, go for it. You will not find many people saying that you shouldn't fly because you don't like it.

As I said before, I get what you're saying, but what people are saying to you is that in some contexts, flying IS the ONLY way to travel. If you are going to a business meeting in NYC from Seattle, flying is the only way to go, not physically, because yes, you could take a bus or kayak or whatever, but within the context of you wanting to retain your job, you only have one option.

I should have clarified that statement, but it was admittedly out of frustration. When I said "Where were all of you defending my human rights then?" I did not mean to direct that at you or anyone on this board for that matter. Honestly.I ment to direct it at the general public. Most of which are okay with myself being singled out and searched/violated on a regular basis but when the idea escapes that maybe EVERYONE is going to get violated in this way, arms are thrown in the air.

I really apologize for it sounding like I ment it directed at people who are members of this forum. I know that is not the case.

But, because boycotting it IS NOT AN OPTION FOR ME (like it probably isnt for most of you) I am going to continue to fly and put up with it until something can be done.

hailseitan wrote:

last time I checked EVERYONE has to do things they might not like to do, as I said before, Flying is a luxury, you ALWAYS have a choice to fly or not. Every example you have given of people who have "no choice" but to fly is ridiculous.

You seem confused.

not confused.

statement 1. The reason boycotting is not an option for me, is because I enjoy getting somewhere in 3 hours as oppose to 3 days. If I was THAT upset about the bodyscanners/grope sessions then I would not fly any longer. (my job does not require it. I realize this makes my decision MUCH easier than it would be otherwise)statement 2. Regardless of if I like it or not, I will put up with the inconvenience of being searched so that I can achieve the CONVENIENCE of reaching my destination in a timely fashion.

Hey, FF, I asked Mr. Elliptical about the Floridians and their push to get private contractors in place of TSA agents, and why that would be preferable. He started to explain that it was because the private organizations would implement more of an Israeli approach (interviewing/profiling-ish) rather than the useless scans... and then we were interrupted. So, I wasn't able to ask if they're going to try to get rid of the scanners in Florida or what is going to happen...

So, this post is pretty much useless except for the fact that they hope to implement more of an interviewing type approach rather than the scanning thing, but what if that leads to things like racial/ethnic profiling?

This is getting too deep for me.

Well, who the heck knows? I still say that privatizing RARELY means "making things more effective and reasonable " Instead, it almost always means "making things more profitable."

But, because boycotting it IS NOT AN OPTION FOR ME (like it probably isnt for most of you) I am going to continue to fly and put up with it until something can be done.

hailseitan wrote:

last time I checked EVERYONE has to do things they might not like to do, as I said before, Flying is a luxury, you ALWAYS have a choice to fly or not. Every example you have given of people who have "no choice" but to fly is ridiculous.

You seem confused.

Can I just echo this?

Mat.

_________________Lady Gaga and Beyonce should run her over with the kitten Wagon for that one comment alone - Torque (speaking of Katy Perry)